[Nikolac]

Hello everyone,

I'm working on a biophysically motivated FSI problem and I wonder why the icoFsiFoam solver is deposited in a "deprecatedSolvers" folder. What should be used instead? I'm not talking of course about the particular fluid/solid models, but whether there is now a method/algorithm available that is considered better for some reason?

Cheers,
N

[Svensen]

The same question... Maybe you already know the answer ?

[D_LEE]

I think that it is considered depreciated because of icoFsiElastciNonLinSolidFoam. From looking at the code it seems that icoFsiFoam doesn't do any loop between solid and liquid within a time step, which might be why they said 'Set up as a fake fluid structure interaction solver' it does:

#       include "setPressure.H"
#       include "solveSolid.H"

#       include "setMotion.H"
#       include "solveFluid.H"

While in the same spot icoFsiElastciNonLinSolidFoam does:

do
        {
            outerCorr++;

#           include "setInterfaceDisplacement.H"

#           include "moveFluidMesh.H"

#           include "solveFluid.H"

#           include "setInterfaceForce.H"

#           include "solveSolid.H"

#           include "calcFsiResidual.H"
        }
        while
        (
            (fsiResidualNorm > outerCorrTolerance)
         && (outerCorr < nOuterCorr)
        );

Also icoFsiElastciNonLinSolidFoam can supposedly run in parallel, but getting that to work in parallel for me with proper Hron Tureck values makes it crash. I get the same error as the people in this thread: http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...tml#post504083 and it appears that there is no working solution, even though there is an AllrunPar script there.

I think that if you want a steady-state solution and only use one core you may aswell use icoFsiFoam.

Svensen from the other post I think that you can view it in paraview if for do paraFoam -case fluid.

[wa$$im]

Could it also be because the solver has stability issues ?